Sunday, March 28, 2021

The Club - Meeting 371 - Male or Female, Bad Behavior is Bad Behavior

“A person who is knowingly bent on bad behavior, gets upset when better behavior is expected of them.” - Jane Austen

 

Hello all.  Welcome back to the Disciplinary Couple’s Club.  Our weekly gathering of men and women who are in, or would like to be in, Domestic Discipline relationships. I hope you all had a great week.

 

Mine was pretty uneventful.  Work continues to scale down as I approach a real exit point.  I actually toyed with taking off ahead of my current plan, but the powers-that-be didn’t want to take me up on it.  I have this aversion to getting paid to do next to nothing—probably a holdover from my very blue collar roots—so I’m trying to treat dealing with that aversion as a growth experience.  And, it’s not like I’m losing a lot of life changing opportunities by riding it out a little while longer.  I spent most of the winter rehabbing from the fix for a chronic injury, and although it is coming along, I’m not going to be training for an Ironman any time in the near future.  And, while spring and summer outdoor activities are just around the corner, our weather is not quite there yet.  In fact, we have a surprising amount of snow left from a storm a couple of weeks ago.   

 

 

So, I ended up spending the week doing some minor home renovation projects, catching up on some reading, and binge watching a Netflix series.  And, of course, having fun with the good discussions we had last week, even though (or perhaps because), they strayed quite a bit from the original topic.  That is fine and, in fact, I keep thinking I need to make these weekly discussions less topic driven.  So, don’t be surprised if some weeks I spend time talking or observing, and then kind of let people take things where they will (within reasonable limits).  Given that I’m once again not particularly inspired by any particular topic, this may be one of those weeks.  So, let's meander a bit based on last week's discussions and see where it leads . . .

 

One thread of last week’s discussion involved Danielle and Liz talking about their childhood experiences and the resentment they felt toward differences in how they were treated compared to their respective brothers.  I was amused and, frankly, a little turned on by their very frank admissions that they would like to see their adult brothers spanked.  I don’t know why those admissions turn me on, but they do.  I think maybe it reflects the simple fact that I find women expressing their genuine desires around DD and exercising power very seductive, including something as straightforward as admitting that spanking someone, or witnessing a spanking, turn them on. I wonder whether the mutual attraction to the power exchange is a big part of what makes long-term DD marriages work, even if the level of interest begins on very different levels.  I also wonder sometimes whether my own interest in the power exchange aspects has changed over time, or whether I misinterpreted some of the nature of the early obsession.  As I noted in a comment to ZM:

 

I am not turned on by the spanking itself, and definitely not in the moment. It's really about the power differential. Interestingly, a few weeks ago I went back and read some of the stories on the DWC site that first attracted me so much to DD, and it was interesting how many of them did have a pronounced FLR element. While I always think of FLR as something we've dabbled in outside of or in addition to DD, it makes me wonder how much of the original obsession was tied to the FLR elements and not specifically to DD. But, that's not quite right either, because the FLR/power exchange elements don't do that much for me absent the whole dynamic of accountability, boundaries. Though, I wonder whether those are about the authenticity of the power exchange and not really about a desire for punishment? As Brett says, it's complicated stuff.

 

Belle and Danielle both responded that the power imbalance in their favor turns them on as well:

 

This is definitely the turn-on for me, the power exchange. He is so much bigger and stronger, yet he obeys me (and only me). In some ways it is an expression of his love, so while I am usually in the moment irritated about the behavior that has triggered the punishment, I also love him for his obedience and am aroused by it. Anger, love, arousal ... it's intoxicating!

Belle

 

I agree completely with Anne and Belle: it is the power exchange that turns me on. I have come to find spanking itself kind of erotic, but that's because it is so symbolic of the power exchange. Other forms of power exchange turn me on too, sometimes even more. That's why I like having a full FLR rather than just DD.

Danielle

 

 

These discussions around origins and motivations always fascinate me, precisely because we are all such complicated creatures and there clearly is no one “right” answer for how we get ourselves into these arrangements which—whether DD, FLR or some mix of the two—all involve some consciously arrived at allocation of authority that includes the authority to correct or punish.  The unique mix of motivations reminds of a poll I took back in 2017 (when Blogger still had a polling widget) that tried to explore the various motivations for getting into DD.  Respondents were allowed to pick more than one answer, and the percentage choosing each option I gave in that poll were as follows (in descending order):

Handing control over to someone for a while                        55%

I like my wife strong and powerful                                        51%

Accountability/penance                                                          47%

Boundaries and rules make me feel better or safer                38%

It's primarily about a spanking interest or fetish                    36%

Stress relief                                                                             35%

I like pain                                                                               9%

Other                                                                                       4%

 

As I noted when posting this poll originally, it may be one of the worst I've ever done.  Among the numerous problems I see in retrospect, it's missing at least one option that I suspect would have ranked pretty highly, namely performance improvement.  Maybe that option is kind of wrapped up in "accountability," but only obliquely.  I also wonder what would have happened had I forced people to choose their primary motivation.

 

In any event, it seems a happy coincidence that men inclined toward DD like “handing over control” to “strong and powerful” wives, while our strong and powerful wives get turned on by having the power to take control even if the degree to which they exercise that control varies widely.  And, on balance, it’s probably a good thing that there are strong women out there who are willing to take control.  I hear KD’s points about gender stereotypes and not over-generalizing, but it doesn’t seem that controversial to me that on average, men really do seem to be having a harder time of it than women these days. While discrimination still obviously exists, I don't think it is a stretch to say that it is increasingly becoming a female dominated world.  In 2009, the number of women in the workforce exceeded men for the first time.  In 2014, women accounted for 55% of undergraduates in four-year colleges. Once there, they tend to earn higher grades and drop out less. In 2019, women for the first time comprised a majority of the college educated workforce.  Women now get more Masters and Doctorate degrees than their male counterparts.

 

So, women are doing great.  Men?  Not so much.  While a little dated and hardly scientific, a study in 2014 showed that 88.7% of Darwin Award (given to people who “eliminate themselves in an extraordinarily idiotic manner, thereby improving our species' chances of long-term survival”) winners were male.  Other truly scientific statistics are just as telling.  Between the ages of 15 and 24, men are three times more likely to die than women, because they are far more likely to engage in reckless behavior or violence. Motor vehicle accidents are the most common cause of death for males in this age group, followed by homicide, suicide, cancer and drowning.  Here is some additional and updated background on these statistics, if you’re interested:

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/20/734408574/new-report-says-college-educated-women-will-soon-make-up-majority-of-u-s-labor-f

https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/mens-health.htm#:~:text=Nearly%20three%2Dquarters%20of%20deaths,each%20year%20in%20the%20U.S.&text=Among%20drivers%20in%20fatal%20motor,or%20greater)%20compared%20with%20women

 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1523476/

 https://www.cdc.gov/healthequity/lcod/men/2017/all-races-origins/index.htm

 https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/males-and-females

 https://www.vox.com/2014/12/11/7378371/darwin-awards-men

 

Even when they aren’t killing themselves and flunking out college, doesn’t it seem like the latest generation of men just need some – motivation?  There is a scene I love in an otherwise cute if uninspiring De Niro movie, The Intern.  Anne Hathaway’s character, “Jules”, owns her own company.  While out enjoying some libations with several of her young male employees after a (contrived and fairly silly) caper, Jules offers the following assessment of the respective states of affair for young men and women:

 

Jules : Here's my theory about this. We all grew up during the "take your daughter to work day" thing, right?

 

Ben : Mm-Hmm. 

 

Jules : So we were always told we could be anything, do anything. And I think guys got, maybe not left behind, but not quite as nurtured, you know? I mean, like, we were the generation of "you go, girl."We had Oprah. And I wonder sometimes how guys fit in, you know? They still seem to be trying to figure it out. They're still dressing like little boys. They're still playing video games.

 

[male employees interjecting about the wonders of video games]

 

Jules : How, in one generation, have men gone from guys like jack Nicholson and Harrison Ford to... [nodding at slacker male employees]

 

So, while I hear KD about over-generalizing and about women having lots of their own issues, it does seem to me that it isn’t that controversial to maintain that on average, men do seem to have the greater need for some additional discipline and motivation. 

 

On the other hand, I do think it’s become a little too easy to characterize every stray male comment or action to some peculiarly male bit of malice or incompetence.  This has been, after all, the year that being a “Karen” became a thing, right?   

 

 

While definitions vary, I kind of liked this from the New York Post:

 

“Karen” has become social-media shorthand meaning a middle-aged white woman — potentially with an asymmetric haircut a la Kate Gosselin, circa 2009 — who makes a big fuss, and is not-so-blissfully ignorant. Recently, a fake American Girl doll ad for “Karen” caught the eyes of Twitter: The doll mock-up is of a sweatsuit-wearing, gun-wielding shopper who “refuses to wear a mask in public places.

 

So, it seems there are plenty of women out there who exemplify the worst of the stereotypes women have taken to slinging about us hapless men – social aggression, stupidity, lack of concern for the welfare of herself and others . . .  Not a pretty picture, and maybe it explains why M/f domestic discipline seems at least as prevalent as our community’s F/m version. Though, of course, the attacks on the Karens of the world can be just as over the top as those aimed at the most innocent example of manly incompetence.



In that vein, I had a run in this week with the female version of “mansplaining.”  I have a covid-era puppy who missed some socializing thanks to the pandemic.  He’s a sweet little guy with people most of the time, but he can be kind of an asshole with other dogs. I’ve been trying to catch him on social skills by taking him to a local dog park.  Some days he does OK.  Others not so much.  But, he usually does better after he has a chance to get settled in.  Therefore, now when we first get there, I tend to keep on the leash a while if he is showing signs of being aggressive.  And, I feel like I have to take him to places with other dogs; otherwise he’s never going to learn to socialize.  So, a few days ago I went to the park later in the day than I usually go, which meant instead of the regulars there were dogs and their owners who were strangers to us.  I took him into the park area with his leash on, and the dog started acting like a jerk, nipping and growling. So, I kept his leash on and walked him around so other dogs could come up to him, but he couldn’t run with them until he settled down. We were walking along a path in the general direction of three women who were hanging out talking while their dogs ran around.  A couple of them came up to us and, sure enough, my dog started growling.  At that point, one of the women started lecturing me about how keeping him on the leash would just make him more aggressive. I explained that he has a habit of being aggressive with other dogs and can’t be trusted off leash initially but usually will settle down after a few minutes.  So, she segued into telling me that if he wasn’t friendly, perhaps I should take him to the other side of the park. I told her, again, that he can be perfectly friendly, but it just takes him a while to get comfortable.  She started to once again give me her unsolicited advice, but I was irritated enough and just walked away.  It wasn’t so much what she said, but the tone from this total stranger, a self-appointed know-it-all regarding dog training and dog park etiquette who inserted herself and just started running her mouth without knowing anything about my dog, me, etc. To KD’s point, it wasn’t mansplaining, womansplaining, Karen-splaining, or whatever. It was just passive-aggressive rude behavior from a note-it-all who happened to be a woman.

 

 

Though, the incident did have one curious effect on me.  I’ve always said that I have no desire to give a woman a disciplinary spanking. None. But, you know what?  I would have loved to put that woman over my knee or would gladly pay to watch her husband do it.

 

Like I said, I have no real topic for this week, so feel free to comment on anything the above brings to mind.

109 comments:

  1. I have a general dislike of people who are know-it-alls, especially when they are ignorant of the real issue at hand. I would have paid to see that woman spanked.

    On the other hand, I have plenty on my mind, but I spent much of the early AM hours writing it, and I'm feeling less energetic than usual, so I won't repeat myself here.

    What breed is your pooch?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's a rescue puppy mutt, who was represented to be a "cattle dog mix." Not even close. He's pretty small, and likes digging and climbing on everything. He reminds a little of the dog on Frasier, leading me to suspect some kind of terrier, mixed with a bunch of other stuff.

      Delete
  2. This may sound strange coming from a "chastity guy", but sometimes.....no screw that......OFTEN I feel that anyone writing seriously on an adult blog on a real issue topic should masturbate first. Then (after washing their hands) type their thought-out and far less sexually-driven response.

    It happens everywhere. It doesn't matter if it's a M/f oriented blog, or a F/m oriented blog, the upper case folks tend to assume a certain gender .......I won't go so far as to say 'superiority'....but maybe a definite gender bias in favor of the wisdom of their own, and serendipitously, the lower case folks will sort of get off on this muscle flexing and suck up to and defer to the almighty power of whichever gender they get off on deferring to. This makes for great one-handed typing, but not for any serious discussion.

    In the BDSM community there is a term "Top's disease" and I have commented and lampooned it in cartoons. It is a real thing and essentially is as simple to explain as quoting Dalberg-Acton's "power corrupts......." axiom. But power is not gender-based. It is far more complicated than the genitals between one's legs. So to assume gender advantage is at best misleading.

    Dan cited a lot of statistics on women and men, but to me it's no different than looking at the economic and social develop of a country over time. If your country , for whatever reason, got a "late start", you may very well be doing better than a previous world power currently on the decline. Human patterns are predictable, but you need time to bear them out. The same is true with women in America. They were certainly held back and have been in the process of catching up ever since. But what happens when, as it seems now, some women are surpassing men? How long will it be before their gender succumbs to the same negative associations with men? It's already starting.

    So yeah, maybe men dominate the Darwin awards now.....but hey, give the ladies some time. I'm sure they'll catch up if society ever puts the same risk=top dog pressure on them.

    -------------

    Part 2: Know-it-alls

    Depending on who you talk to that has had encounters with me, you'll get a pretty wide variety of answers on this one. Those who know me well, know I'm pretty honest about what I don't know. These same people know when to seek my advice and when to help me figure out the restaurant tip. LOL. But others have certainly accused me of this. (Can I tell you how many times I've seen someone building something that is unsafe, bound to break, or could just be done better and tried to help? Not out of arrogance but CONCERN!) But as ZM pointed out last week, this is a sticky wicket as they say. What does one do when they simply DO know more bout something than the person they are dealing with? Hide it? Let the person fail? Maybe snicker "poor idiot bastard" when they do?
    Let's face it, there are a lot of incompetents out there and if you have more sense than the average bear, you are going to spend a lot of time interacting with folks with less sense than you. And, perhaps, this conditioning leads some to assume ignorance in people when that is not the case. Let's call it the "Top's disease" of smart people. So the next time you have to deal with an annoying "know-it-all" offering unsolicited advice, take a moment to discern whether they are a truly boorish didact or perhaps simply someone trying to help who routinely encounters idiots and has just incorrectly assumed you were one more based on the odds. And how different is that than the person of the gender you like to submit to assume that your submission means they must be right about everything? The only difference I see is that the you probably want to smack the know-it-all but want the bossy dominant to tell you how to do things and perhaps smack you because you've eroticized their "know-it-all-ness"! LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you that women are likely just as subject to the corruption of power than men. Hell, I've witnessed in multiple times, once to such an extent that it led me to believe that for some people, power is truly a mind altering drug. I'm not as sure that they will ever catch up to men on Darwin Award-like actions. I suspect our testosterone-laden biology predisposes us to more risk-taking and violence.

      "What does one do when they simply DO know more bout something than the person they are dealing with?" Honestly, I am pretty prone to letting people learn hard lessons. When dealing with people on my team at work, my kids and even my wife, there are times I offer a view that they clearly are disinclined to hear at that particular moment, so I don't push it. I just consciously shut up and let the inevitable unfold.

      Delete
    2. I guess that's one way, but I actually get stressed when I see something about to go awry. Nothing annoyed me more when I was working than to point out some approaching storm only to have it ignored until it was too late and everyone (including me) had to do double work to deal with the predicted disaster that finally hit.

      Oh, and I meant to comment on this as well, especially since cited: "So, while I hear KD about over-generalizing and about women having lots of their own issues, it does seem to me that it isn’t that controversial to maintain that on average, men do seem to have the greater need for some additional discipline and motivation."

      As you and I have discussed privately, the "on average" real numbers do not bear this out. We both know the ratio of M/f DD far outpaces F/m DD. I would even venture it might be as high as 4:1, maybe more. So it seems women need the guidance more? Or maybe WANT it more? My personal anecdotal experience is pretty mixed, so in the non-DD world I'd say I've known just as many relationships where a woman would be best to lead as the opposite. It's basic biology. Brains determine more than genitals do.

      Delete
    3. I like to think of myself as generally a good, compassionate person, but I can be surprisingly cold-hearted when it comes to people bearing the likely consequences of their actions after I've warned them of those likelihoods. If it's in an area where I have more experience and hard-earned wisdom and they choose to blow me off, I'm pretty damn comfortable just sitting back and watching them do what they want and then the more or less inevitable fallout. I once had an annual review at work that I am extremely proud of. It had a line that said something to the effect of: "Dan can be very harsh and inflexible in some of his opinions . . . and unfortunately he usually turns out to be right."

      I don't think that the number of people who may be practicing DD is really indicative of how many need it or could profit from it. IMO, the disparity more likely results from social mores and hierarchies that make women more likely to openly explore the "bottom" role and men much less so. Then there is the whole Christian DD thing, which seems to me to be MUCH more prevalent in M/f relationships and that itself locks in some very traditional hierarchies.

      Delete
    4. What is your view on the Christian DD thing?

      Delete
    5. Dan wrote:
      “I don't think that the number of people who may be practicing DD is really indicative of how many need it or could profit from it. …The disparity more likely results from social mores and hierarchies that make women more likely to openly explore the "bottom" role and men much less so. … (Furthermore), the whole Christian DD thing, seems to me … MUCH more prevalent in M/f relationships … (which) itself locks in some very traditional hierarchies.”
      This perspective which I strongly relate to is a stand-alone argument for this blog and its continuation. I guess I always felt that DD and especially F/M DD was probably always a too well kept secret that many couples would benefit from. In my own circle of acquaintances alone there are at least a couple of dozen couples that could profit from more information about their relationship options. But reading this blog now for a few years I am even more deeply convinced of the benefits of DD, once a couple gains some experience with it. And today in spite of the saturated kink and sex covert on the net, there are very few places where a couple can go to learn from one another and to discuss issues and questions re DD or FLR’s
      Alan

      Delete
    6. Hugh Jass: While I am not going to get into it in detail, I would say I have a very high degree of discomfort with any system in which the subordination of one person to another is claimed to be a dictate from God. Also, pretty much every time someone from that dynamic has started participating on this blog, it ends up with a bunch of "here is what I do to justify my kink and pretend it is not kinky" line-drawing that I don't have much patience with.

      Delete
    7. "I feel that anyone writing seriously on an adult blog on a real issue topic should masturbate first."

      Yes! Same for trying to think clearly about the real discipline component of DD or make a request to their spouse. I think that's a part of why it's easier to be honest with self and partner about an arrangement based on enjoying spanking on some level.

      Delete
    8. Dan, presumably your view assumes a m/f DD marriage. What would you think about a Christian f/m DD marriage?

      Delete
    9. Art and I are Christians who practice f/m DD. However we would not say that we practice Christian Domestic Discipline. I see no Biblical connection to DD in either direction. While I don't think Jesus himself would have employed corporal punishment with other adults, He did not expressly speak on the matter. The little I have read about CDD, here and elsewhere, is controversial, and we want no part of it. If our pastor knew about our DD and was opposed to it, I am sure we would listen to his point of view.
      I would say that Art's arrogance is not very Christian behavior, and I am helping him curb it as he has requested. I have absolutely no concern about whether we are doing something that might be against our faith (or approved by it).
      Liz

      Delete
    10. Liz, your views are consistent with my own, other than I wouldn't care too much about what a pastor or preacher had to say about it. I'm not sure how Jesus would feel about corporal punishment. He seemed to go after the money changers at the temple pretty hard. ;-)

      I think it is very hard for some people with a fundamentalist bent to accept that Jesus had remarkably little to say about sexual issues or family life in general. In fact, the very few times he has anything at all to say about family it was in the context of telling people to give up their family affiliations and follow him. The people who insist their "family values" are grounded in the Bible are reading things into at least the gospels that simply are not there, at least not expressly.

      Delete
    11. Well, since ostensibly this chain follows my comment, I suppose I should feel free to jump back in. But there's so much. Maybe I can do this in bullet form?

      Dan: About men and Darwin awards......the issue is nothing more than award criteria. Women engage in stupid, persistent, reckless behavior all of the time, it's just not the spectacularly bizarre shit men do. Instead, it's relationship-based. Women go for guys who are dangerous, incompetent, abusive, possibly addicted, lazy, etc. etc. and yet? They CHOOSE these relationships and stick with them long after everyone around them has pointed out the flashing warning signs. If the Darwin awards had this category, women would top the list consistently. It's similarly dumb and risky, but just doesn't involve jumping a dumpster with a rocket-tricycle.

      Also, the belief that men need DD more than women but women seek it more out of socialization and desire, again assumes women are not as flawed as men. Which is simply untrue. Anecdotally, I know way more couples where the guy is far more competent than the woman. I'm not saying this is always true, but to assume the opposite is just as imbalanced. The same is true of women I've worked with.

      All: How my comment led to a discussion on CDD is a testament to how far the comments this week have strayed from "Male or Female: Bad Behavior is Bad Behavior". But since it seems no one wants to offer opinions on this topic of Dan's and prefer CDD, here goes: CDD is an absurdity regardless of the gender dynamic, and regardless of what was said or not said by this "Jesus fellow". It seems ridiculous that the opinions of a possibly fictional or perhaps a "composite" unemployed itinerant from 2000 years ago, who never married or had a family, and who instead demonstrated delusional behavior by insisting they were a deity would hold any sway with anyone. Ask yourself: if such a person spoke now, would you believe them? What about Minerva springing from a chop to Zeus' head? You believe that too? Christianity is just as silly as any man-made myth, so to base DD on it? Really? Furthermore, given the feelings here that men need women to guide them, why are we listening to a guy at all? The church is profoundly misogynist, even today, How does that fit with FLR? LOL

      But enough on CDD. Does anyone have a comment on this week's actual topic? I was quite excited when I saw it and have grown disappointed by how it is being avoided. I would be curious to hear about how couples acknowledge that a person with authority is not always right and could well be in more need of correction that the partner who desires it? We know what the ladies think should happen to guys exhibiting bad behavior. What about women who need motivation or display 'attitude'?

      Delete
    12. "Also, the belief that men need DD more than women but women seek it more out of socialization and desire, again assumes women are not as flawed as men. Which is simply untrue." This is a point you've made a couple of times, but I see no objective basis for it. The statistics around accidental deaths, drug and alcohol problems, life expectancy, etc., all seem to point to same conclusion, i.e. that when it comes to doing dumb shit that puts oneself at risk or has negative impact on health, education, jobs, etc., men are fuck-ups at a rate that exceeds the number of fuck-up women. That is not at all to say that there are not women who are fuck-ups, but statistically the numbers are what they are, and they don't paint a pretty picture about male responsibility.

      "They CHOOSE these relationships and stick with them long after everyone around them has pointed out the flashing warning signs. . . . It's similarly dumb and risky, but just doesn't involve jumping a dumpster with a rocket-tricycle." Is it dumb? I'm not sure. They get some benefit from the masculine, alpha-male gene pool, while sometimes going for the more stable, responsible guy as husband. They may or may not "stick with" the less stable but more virile guy, but I think it may work the other way. They stick with the guy who seems more or less willing and able to be a long-term provider, while secretly sprinkling the gene pool with seed of the risk-taking alpha guy who is getting some when the stable provider guy is distracted.

      Re: Christianity, I think it actually is very possible to admire the heroic in Jesus as portrayed in the gospel, and also to respect moral or ethical teachings from him, the Buddha, and other religious/moral/ethical teachers. I just don't think he had a thing to day about DD, let alone CDD or much of anything else regarding male/female relations or family life.

      Delete
    13. Well, I can't argue against statistics, but I was looking up something unrelated and came across one on shoplifting which showed it was a pretty even split on men and women.

      On my second point I think we are seeing it differently. I am specifically talking about women who make horrendous relationship choices which I don't see guys making. ....like staying with an abuser. Many women do choose based on provider-status which makes sense, but others don't..........just like not all guys kill themselves doing stupid stuff. I also knew way more women alcoholics than men, but that could just be the circles I travelled in. I guess there are statistics and anecdotal personal experiences and my personal experiences have never shown women to be anything more than people with different parts than guys. Some are smart, others dumb as rocks. Some lazy others productive.

      As for picking out good stuff in a 'teacher', I agree completely. I think one can learn a lot of valuable lessons from various sources. That just makes sense. I personally have learned much from Atticus Finch, and he's maybe just as real as Jesus and definitely just as divine. LOL

      Delete
    14. Well, I am an Atticus fan too. But, while Jesus inspired a few billion followers over 2000+ years, Atticus' "mother" wrote a sequel that turned him into a racist. So, probably not an entirely apt comparison. LOL.

      Delete
    15. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    16. "Jesus inspired a few billion followers over 2000+ years, Atticus' "mother" wrote a sequel that turned him into a racist. So, probably not an entirely apt comparison. LOL."

      I think it's an apt comparison, but more suited to a cocktail-lubricated tete a tete. A Jesus vs. Atticus contest would be quite fun. You are right about the "fan" numbers, but you left out another big win for the guy from Nazareth: body count! Counting deaths from crusades, reformation/counter-reformation, Inquisition, witch-burning, poverty enabled by Christianity, and deaths from AIDs which condoms could have prevented, we're talking what? Millions? I think Atticus doesn't score nearly as high there. (I am not even aware of a single death that resulted from the reading or watching of "To Kill a Mockingbird".) So on death and suffering the points go to Jesus. ;-) Let's pick this up another time, it's a worthy banter.

      Delete
    17. You're confusing death by Christ with death by religion and misunderstanding of religion. Given that Jesus said virtually nothing about sex, it's pretty hard to say with any credibility that his actual teachings are responsible for deaths from AIDS. It's at least as tenuous as saying, "KD is an atheist. Mao and Stalin were atheists. Mao and Stalin killed millions. Therefore, KD's beliefswere responsible for the deaths of millions."

      Delete
    18. So are you saying the Catholic Church is not basing their positions on Jesus? Or perhaps that Paul was lying when he said he spoke with him? I am confused by the parameters of this comparison. You mentioned: "Jesus inspired a few billion followers over 2000+ years". Inspired. Well, he inspired the same things I mentioned.

      As for the atheist connection, it is just as arbitrary to assign that to both me and Stalin & Mao as to say we are all male. Perhaps the better connection between Mao & Stalin and the people they killed would be their politics either as Communists or dictators. It seems more rooted to the action than their belief or non-belief in a god, since plenty of theist monarchs have acted similarly.

      Delete
    19. Well, I suppose consistent with the current debate here on male versus female misbehavior point out that the vast majority of wars and mass killing events--whether religious, political, territorial or tribal in inspiration or motivation--have, in fact, been led by men. But, then someone will come along and tell me, "No, your entire premise is wrong because I read about this one chick who ruled Egypt for awhile, and she killed some people. So, you must be wrong."

      Delete
    20. Hard to say when you weigh things up proportionally (number of years spent leading a country vs. number of wars, or number of female leaders vs. wars). There are other examples of wars under female leaders though. Golda Meir and the Yom Kippur War. Margaret Thatcher with the Falklands War. But maybe this is all a reflection of risk-taking. To reach a position of power in the first place requires risk, which men seem to be more inclined to take.

      Delete
    21. For social scientists, it’s important to try to understand these things, but I don’t base my relationships or how I deal with people on their gender. Every individual is just that, and there could be some nasty surprises if one expects something based on how a man or woman should think or act. I agree without reservation that bad behavior is what it is, male or female. Some number of women, I haven’t counted, exhibit all the negative characteristics possible in humans. In positions of power, over time, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the same problems we face in a patriarchal society, but I don’t know. Like a man, if a woman wants to improve or be held accountable for her behavior, I find that equally compelling and worthy of respect.

      I’m not religious, but my feeling is that, if one buys into that whole thing, then why not also form a CDD relationship out of it? Faith requires no solid rationale, so go for it, make it work for you.

      Delete
    22. It's nice to see this take such an interesting turn. I tend to agree with both Hugh and Brett. I too believe that women will suffer the same degeneration as men have, if given enough time and opportunity to do so. And that's what I meant by comparing this to developing countries with "late starts".

      The CDD thing was supposed to be a playful bit of sparring, but perhaps religion is best left untouched no matter the circumstances.

      Delete
    23. Dan, you described a very popular misconception about "alpha males" and their supposedly better genes. Well, it's actually quite different. In reality, there are no alpha men / women, betta men / women. These designations are not acceptable to human society, since for the main part of anthropogenesis, humans existed in a hunter-gatherer society. These societies were, in fact, egalitarian and the resources were distributed evenly within them. Moreover, the sataust of the leader did not exceed the statute of the rest of the tribe. This can be seen even in the research of modern hunter-gatherers. Misconceptions about "alpha / betta / omega / gamma / sigma, etc." originated with the work of monitoring the society of the wolf pack. Subsequently, low-quality popular science articles and incompetent journalists replicate this myth on human society.

      Now we can talk about genes. It is known that it is mainly the woman who chooses the breeding partner. And what do we see, what choice did women make during most of anthropogenesis? Maybe women chose the strongest and most aggressive baboons in order to have the "best genes"? Well, in fact, the opposite is true. Throughout most of anthropogenesis, females have chosen, on average, less aggressive and smaller males for breeding. This is an indisputable fact, as evidenced by a decrease in sexual dimorphism during most of anthropogenesis and a reduction in kalyks. And in fact, this is logical, since the genes of the most aggressive and large males, in fact, are not the "best genes" at all. It really doesn't make sense for evolution, as humans are a very weak species. He is unable to compete with large predators. Moreover, a person is not able to survive outside the equatorial zone of the Earth. Man has settled on the planet only thanks to the tools of labor. Well, what was hunting and survival with tools? Well, she had nothing to do with being aggressive. In fact, aggressiveness was a negative factor. That is why most of the leaders, in fact, were not very large and not aggressive, but cooperative and intellectual.

      P.S. If you want, I can provide scientific research for almost every statement I make.

      P.P.S. Sorry if my English is not very good. I live in Putin's kleptocracy, and it is not very convenient for me to learn the language in this fascist state, which is in a long recession and on the verge of collapse.

      Delete
  3. When I think about Dan's poll, the answer that is missing - behavior improvement - is by far the most important, in my opinion. Without behavior improvement, you do not have Domestic DISCIPLINE. You may have Domestic Punishment, but the two words are not synonyms, even though we often use them that way. I mean discipline in the traditional (Greek?) definition: Being a disciple of. I am helping Jimmy to be a disciple of "respect for me (and all women)." Punishment (and reward) is merely a tool to help develop a discipline, in which one follows and develops a belief or activity.

    Because Jimmy (and other spanked husbands) have had difficulty developing one or more disciplines on his own (self-discipline), he has agreed to give me the authority to in effect force him to develop it with external motivation, i.e., punishment.

    So if Jimmy's behavior is not improving in the areas we have agreed on, then to me there is no discipline. I guess one could argue that he is developing the discipline of being able to accept punishment (but for no purpose), but that is really rather ludicrous.

    I had a professor in college who was big on the true (original) meaning of discipline, and helped me see the distinctions. To me, Domestic Discipline needs to be just that: the development of one or more disciplines through the domestic partnership. For most of us on here that means the wife helping the husband develop necessary disciplines through the consensual use of authority (power exchange) that includes punishment.

    Yes, my DD with Jimmy has other overtones that have been a surprise to me, including the erotic nature of this transference of authority. But if his behavior were not improving, I would stop spanking him. The eroticism is a side benefit, not the end goal.
    Belle

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, behavior improvement was an odd one for me to leave out, though I do think it was to a large extent subsumed in "accountability." I suspect many of the respondents thought so too, since only 4% said they were into DD for some reason that was not expressly in the poll. Also, note that what I said was missing was "performance" improvement, not "behavior" improvement. While the distinction is subtle, it's there. I think of performance improvement as things like discipline at work tasks, health and fitness, etc.

      Delete
    2. Hi Belle!

      Quick question:
      If a husband, such as yours, is provided with discipline to improve his behavior, doesn't it mean that if your discipline works, after a period of time (say 1 year) that you no longer need to discipline him for it?

      An example: I run a Household with Shilo(my husband) and Stitch (my long-term Partner and former husband) and there are what I call House Rules and Guidelines to keep things moving smoothly, and there is a list of rules about unacceptable behaviors (no lying, no smoking, no alcohol, putting the toilet seat down, etc.)that I expected them to follow. Now, after 7+ years, those good behaviors that I expect them to exemplify are second nature, so I no longer have to discipline or punish them. I haven't had to spank Stitch but once, and the last time I felt Shilo was deserving of discipline was a very long time ago, so there's no longer a need to spank him.

      Is that your goal, or have you fallen into the trap of spanking him "Just because?"

      Delete
    3. Merry,
      Jimmy and I are so new to DD that I haven't even thought of the day when it might not be necessary because his behavior has improved so much. What has happened a bit, and likely will happen some more, is an expansion of issues for which DD is used.
      While we both find DD to be erotic, at this point I can't really visualize a "just because" spanking, which of course would not be DD. I guess at that point, if we ever reach it, the spankings might stop. But that is a ways off. On a 10-point scale of respect, I would say Jimmy has gone from a 0 to a 3 or 4 in a few months of DD. That is significant progress, but he isn't even halfway to a 9, which would be my minimum standard. The bath brush isn't being restricted to the shower stall any time soon.
      Belle

      Delete
    4. Thank you for clarifying Belle.

      Delete
    5. Hi Merry,
      You have raised an interesting question about the frequency discipline occurs as a relationship evolves. Maybe it’s a topic Dan will consider for future forums as there is probably a wide spectrum of experiences. We have been closer to Belle’s experience where my wife’s disciplinary authority has expanded as time went on as more things became “spankable”. So most of the original issues like carelessness, thoughtlessness, and arrogance with her have been resolved, but a few of those still flare up occasionally while at the same time she has become stricter. I actually get many fewer spankings than the first year or so we were together but they are usually harder and longer ones. I asked her once whether she thought spanking would become unnecessarily someday. Her answer, which has turned out to be correct, was that the need for it would lessen but she didn’t see a time when I wouldn’t need to know it was there.
      Alan

      Delete
    6. That's what I envision with Jimmy. He's a fun-lovin' spontaneous mouthy guy, which I imagine will keep his ass in trouble for the rest of our lives!

      Delete
    7. Hello Alan!

      I have added things over the years, but my guess (?) is that Shilo has reached a point where he'd prefer to avoid discipline. I speak, he does (or doesn't do)

      Delete
    8. Merry,
      I don't know Shilo, but my wife would probably want to do so
      Alan

      Delete
    9. I grew up in a house where getting in trouble meant the possibility of a spanking. I guess if “discipline worked,” there would have come a time when it was no longer needed. While the threat of punishment certainly influenced behavior, and taught some valuable lessons along the way, spanking continued to be needed occasionally for as long as it was being used.

      The way I see it, adults who need discipline are not so different than older children who need it. For an adult going into such a relationship, the question is how immature, careless or irresponsible are they? If they have tremendous flaws and need lots of training, then you should see much improvement, but probably not a complete change of character. If I was in a DD relationship, I would have to be aware of the threat, and that would reduce the chances of screw ups or risk taking, but I would still be a fallible human being. Improving behavior is one thing; creating a paragon of virtue is another.

      Delete
    10. Brett: "The way I see it, adults who need discipline are not so different than older children who need it. For an adult going into such a relationship, the question is how immature, careless or irresponsible are they?"

      I am SOOOOOO glad for this comment because it may explain why I sometimes seem so antagonistic towards certain DD sentiments, especially when placed in a gender-based criteria....although this one is clearly not, since you say this of both genders. You see, I don't agree with this sentiment even when not gender-based. At least not totally. I know, not believe or think, but KNOW this is not entirely true because it is certainly not true of me.....and I'm sure others. The reason I submit to DD is rooted in much more of mood management than discipline for immaturity, carelessness, or irresponsibility. So when such characteristics are definitively associated with the basis for DD, I bristle. And when they are associated with DD because men are the ones who act this way, my bristling turns resentful. I'm sure there are many who fit this mold to a "T", but that just means no one should assume that DD is better for men, because men are all fuck-ups. It's as demeaning as if, based on my ex, and not Rosa, I associated female Tops with power-hungry, impossible-to-please, controlling bitches. Now in the case of my ex, this would be true. But what if based on that experience alone, I assumed such a thing about ALL women who discipline their husbands? I doubt that would be too popular.....or accurate. So if your experience is with one guy who acts a certain way, yes, you might be inclined to think, since we share this rare kink, we must all be the same. But we are not.

      And that is why I SOOOOOOO appreciated this week's topic. Sadly it didn't go quite as I thought it would.

      Delete
    11. I should probably let this go, but who exactly has said that "ALL" men are this or "ALL" women are that. You seem to be taking great offense at something that no one has actually said, and at the same time suggesting that your anecdotes render all statistical and other analyses completely irrelevant, wrong, biased, offensive, etc.

      Delete
    12. Hmmm and here I thought that post would help. Silly me. I'm also thinking "I should probably let this go"..............and rather than try to go post by post, week by week, I am going to walk away from this since olive trees seem to be out of season. (but to be clear, I admitted with this: "Well, I can't argue against statistics," that my anecdotes are not proof, but went on to say that my experiences did not align with some of them and admitted also that in one example at lest, such discrepancy could be due to the circles I travelled in. So, there's that. Where I said statistics were any of the things you listed is not immediately apparent to me.)

      Delete
    13. KD, there must be many reasons why adults get into a DD relationship. If it’s just to manage our moods, and we’re otherwise sufficiently mature, thoughtful and responsible, then that would suggest a limited need for discipline. I would hope to be that kind of DD partner. However, my point was that, whatever kind of person we are, discipline applied by our partner may not be a permanent fix of anything. In the case of mood management, that’s a given. The success of discipline shouldn’t be measured in all-or-nothing terms.

      Delete
    14. Brett: Yes. In our case discipline is pretty rare. It happens but sometimes it's more of a feelings thing. Which, if you've read my posts in the past, is why I am also big on consent for each punishment. Rosa agrees and would rather wait until I'm on board than impose something that breeds resentment. We are not typical in these regards. And as for being someone who needs discipline to do chores, or not name-call, or not over-indulge? Nope. Not me. Rosa appreciates this and we do our DD accordingly.

      And no, you are right, DD is not a panacea. For some things it may not even be effective as a deterrent. But even in these cases it can give recourse to an offended party, which is often helpful. DD as guidance is ideal. DD as behavior modification is possible. But DD as simple retribution is another viable alternative....and one that need not exist without the other benefits.

      Delete
  4. Hard to discern whether or not this post fits in with the theme of the posting this week, given the lack of a decided theme, so I think I'll draw on a few different themes.

    Regarding spanking of siblings, in the home I grew up in, the male children were spanked, but the female children were not. There were various reasons for this. Our parents wanted us boys to grow up to be tough and willing to take physical pain (and didn't have this expectation for the female children). Also, they wanted to instil a sense of chivalry, generated by the situation of the male children getting spankings and not the female children. Also, they wanted us to grow up with the understanding that boys should not hit girls and they decided they wanted to practice what they preached in the home as well, hence why I have no knowledge of any of the female children being spanked ever. I suppose that as a result, I have found the idea of m/f spanking. to be unusual, whatever the statistics say about this being more common than f/m spanking.

    Belle, I definitely agree with what you say about behaviour improvement. It is hard for my wife to gauge what I would have been like as a husband without DD, since we did it from the start, but I was definitely a bit of a "free spirit" (to put it mildly) before I married her. She had to be assertive to get me under control a number of times and some things I just stopped doing when I got married because I knew marriage was not the environment for it (I don't know how I got away with what I did as a bachelor) and I would be punished accordingly.

    Regarding the Darwin awards, yes, there is definitely a case for the idea that men are overall much more reckless than women, causing the higher number of male Darwin awards. My wife has sometimes joked that it might save more lives in the long run if the wives of the most "Darwinist" men (possibly including me, lol) didn't just discipline them, but put them to sleep before they harm other people with their silly risky behaviour as well, e.g. this military officer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRQYJznvJNI

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding men being more reckless than women, I can certainly that holds true for me. I have also noticed over the years that I have less aversion to risk than most other guys too (not only physical but risks of every sort), so I guess I am lucky to have not been a Darwin award recipient - at least yet!

      Isn't it interesting that the things that make us feel so alive are the very things that can quickly kill us?

      -ZM

      Delete
    2. Yes, it is definitely interesting. How does your wife react to your "Darwinist" behaviour generally? Does she tolerate it? Does she take action against it?

      Delete
    3. Jimmy faces danger almost every day in his profession, and he has chosen to do so. However he does not take work risks unnecessarily and the risks are for a purpose, so I assume you would not consider them Darwinian.

      He plays hard, too, but not dangerously. But if he were to do something like ride a motorcycle without a helmet or get drunk and go rock-climbing or whatever, I certainly would not hesitate to use DD to remind him of his responsibility to be safe.

      Delete
    4. If you put your ass at risk (figuratively), you put your ass at risk (literally)!

      Delete
    5. ZM: "Isn't it interesting that the things that make us feel so alive are the very things that can quickly kill us?" As Nietzsche advised, the key to the height of happiness in life is to "live dangerously."

      Delete
    6. I venture that Nietzsche meant dangerously more in terms of our thinking, our philosophy, our politics, than he meant physical danger. But I also think that women are more concerned with safety and security than men are, and that has a biological connection to women having a biological need to care for their babies, whereas men have a choice whether to care for their babies. Men, as the hunter-gatherers, take more physical risks, and that has continued to today. These may be considered stereotypes or they may be considered to be accurate descriptions of gender differences.

      Delete
    7. Belle, while pure speculation, I don't doubt that our hunter-gatherer history does, in fact, account for some of the difference in risk-taking.

      Delete
    8. Belle wrote: “Men, as the hunter-gatherers, take more physical risks today … These may be considered stereotypes or… accurate descriptions of gender differences. “
      Stereotypes they may be, but accurate descriptions of some male behavior they definitely are ss well – a generalization supported by volumes of evolutionary biology study. It is important to keep in mind when we address topics like this one that genes expressed over eons of time do strongly influence male and female behavior. Moving from science into opinion (what are forums for??), my opinion is that a hell of a lot of male “instinctual” behavior has become dysfunctional in modern society –while some instinctual female behavior is a very good fit for our postindustrial technologically oriented world. This explains partly why there is so much bad male behavior today –and also why females as a gender are doing so much better.
      Alan

      Delete
    9. Alan, I agree, and it's why I'm always skeptical of equating something being "natural" with it being good or beneficial. There are a lot of behaviors that may have gone on for eons or that are biologically based that no longer serve us.

      Delete
    10. Alan,I think that you are wrong. You talk about a hunter-gatherer society as a society where women were involved in caring for children. Well, this is actually not true. Yes, women hunter-gatherers, on average, cared for children more often than men, but the ratio was somewhere around 65/35. In addition, in fact, for most of anthropogenesis, it was women who provided most of the food. This message was different for different tribes, but on average ranged from 40% to 70%. And in fact, getting food on the savanna has always been associated with risk.

      Delete
    11. Артём’
      I am not sure what you think you read but whatever it was, it wasn’t anything I said or implied. For your convenience I repeat the nucleus of my post re the science of it:” … genes expressed over eons of time do strongly influence male and female behavior.” This is hardly controversial. There is - among others issues you note- nothing about women, child care or food gathering in my post. The data you went on to digress more or less accurately represents the consensus from Anthropology and I generally endorse it although the scholarship is hardly settled as you imply.
      Alan

      Delete
    12. Alan, well, a man doesn't actually have more aggressive genes. At least I haven't read that it would be significant.

      Delete
  5. Aunt Kay was my LIFE partner and that's a big complex thing. The disciplinary aspect was amazing. But if I think back disciplinary ACTION probably involved .001% of our time. If anything she was my manager in many ways, especially work. The best metaphor I can figure is if you think about how creatives, like actors, writers, artists, etc, need a manager because they are good at one aspect while the manager is good at taking care of other parts.

    I am exceptional at what I do. But without my partner/manager I'm not doing very well at the career stuff. My point is that the spanking aspect, even though it is huge for us spankos, is actually just the cherry on the sundae. Aunt Kay was like Belle in that she expected results fro her efforts and did not appreciate it if the changes, actions, whatever were not forthcoming.

    So for me, the absence of my partner and trusted advisor is resulting in low productivity in some areas. I know it's up to me now and I am willing. I'm just not very able in the areas she took care of.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomy,
      Your posts are so touching that they often make me cry. I feel for you as you miss your life partner and the many ways she helped you.
      I think many creative types like you need someone to help manage their careers so they can concentrate on their art. I hope you can find someone to fill that role.
      I am a good business manager and do manage our monthly budget. Jimmy doesn't need more help than that. We also like keeping some of our income separate. That way, what Jimmy wastes on sports betting or whatever is not offensive to me, nor does he see what I spend on makeup or shoes. With two incomes and no kids and a house with a low mortgage payment, we are doing just fine.
      I wish you all the best, Tomy, both in your creative endeavors and your cateer management.
      Belle

      Delete
    2. Thank you Belle. It means a lot coming from you.

      Delete
    3. "I am exceptional at what I do. But without my partner/manager I'm not doing very well at the career stuff." I love the sentiment

      Delete
  6. Hugh,
    Jimmy is also something of a free spirit, which is fine by me as long as it doesn't hurt our marriage. He used to go to the bar after work and come home when he felt like it. Not any more. We are designating a weekly night that is boys night out and girls night out, and we both get home whenever. The other six days we meet at home for dinner - and he knows better than to be late.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What sort of punishment does being late for dinner on one of the other six nights normally warrant?

      Delete
    2. One swat per minute unless he shows up with dinner!

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  7. Belle wrote: “if his behavior were not improving, I would stop spanking him. The eroticism is a side benefit, not the end goal”. This captures the essence of DD to me. I am going to turn Belle’s point around by saying if I couldn’t see my behavior, attitude, and our relationship grow and thrive with it I would stop presenting my bum for discipline. Yes the eroticism is a huge plus but the actual corporal punishment is anything but and I would not endure it without the behavioral and relationship benefits. I could conjure up some pretty vivid fantasies that didn’t require the physical punishment if eroticism was the end goal of it all.
    Alan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What are the main relationship benefits you encounter? For us, it is being able to draw a clean slate after each session.

      Delete
    2. Hugh,
      “What are the main relationship benefits you encounter? For us, it is being able to draw a clean slate after each session”.
      It’s that for sure, including any lingering anger she has or guilt I feel. But it’s really a lot more about the trust and intimacy that comes from it. I have told her before that I feel when she bares my bum, she is also baring my soul and it does open me up to a special closeness not often experienced. The whole experience just strips me of my defenses and any posturing or pretense.
      Alan

      Delete
    3. Alan, I know the feeling. It is more or less exactly what I feel. Baring my buttocks, I foresake any protection the clothes might offer and assuring her that I am not cheating by using padding. I suppose I feel the same way about clothing generally: it represents our pretences and defences. Removing it shows who we really are and leaves us vulnerable. For this reason, my wife wearing a grid suit goes well with my nudity. A man letting his wife spank him is a huge bond of intimacy.

      Delete
    4. Hi Hugh and Alan,
      I concur with both of these benefits. The "clean slate" part is not as often true for us, since most spankings are not due to misbehavior, but rather from things like not doing as well on my diet, but during those rare punishment spankings, there is no denying that it results in a clean slate and no lingering resentment or hard feelings.

      Intimacy is something that I hadn't really expected from DD, so both my wife and I were both so very surprised at how intimate it felt the first time, and that intimacy continues to this day.

      For us, I would have to add "communication" as well. Spanking is an incredibly powerful form of communication for those who are wired for this. My wife has used this to really get through to me on several issues, and it has resulted in me really understanding how she feels about something - listening not only to her words but also her heart - and making material change to my attitudes and behaviors. No amount of nagging would have accomplished that.

      As for clothing, it is kind of a mixed bag. On the one hand, when I am completely naked I feel much more vulnerable, but on the other hand, I really shouldn't, since ultimately it is almost always her being concerned about how damaged my bottom looks that stops a spanking. So when I am fully bared, the spanking is likely to be shorter.

      -ZM

      -ZM

      Delete
    5. Relationship benefits of wife spanking husband:
      1. Improved behavior by husband
      2. Empowered wife
      3. Enhanced intimacy
      4. Reduced resentment
      5. Reduced arguing
      6. Clean slate after punishment

      Detriments of wife spanking husband:
      1. Husband has a hard time sitting comfortably.

      Belle

      Delete
    6. @ Belle:

      I'm going to play "Devil's Advocate" and point out that while YOU might feel "Reduced resentment" unless you really take the time to discuss things afterward, you run the risk of your husband feeling resentment that might build up.

      In other words, don't be fooled into thinking that spanking your husband will "fix" everything.

      Delete
    7. Belle: Your list is quite thorough, but especially in light of this week's topic, don't you think you left something out? Wives! Would not that list also apply to wives?

      Delete
    8. Belle's list probably would apply to a good many wives in M/f relationships, but of course a M/f relationship isn't what she is in or the topic of this blog.

      Delete
    9. kd,
      On a blog with the URL disciplinedhubbies, I would say the list does NOT apply to wives. I know you wish it did!

      Merry,
      Yes, thanks for the tip. I am aware that a spanked husband could build up resentment, and I don't think DD fixes everything. We do talk about the punishments as needed. Honestly, now that the punishments are usually followed by a rush to the bedroom, I think resentment is rather unlikely. But I'll keep an eye out for it. We're still in our DD "honeymoon phase."
      Belle

      Delete
    10. Belle and Dan: I am quite aware of the overall gender dynamic of this blog, but I apologize if I misinterpreted this week's specific topic, since it seems I must have. Not sure how? The title and body of the post seemed to have a definite "women can misbehave too" gist. Oh well, perhaps my reading comprehension will be sharper next time.

      Delete
    11. Dan,
      I think you should ban from your blog any discussion of:
      Christian Domestic Discipline
      Jewish Domestic Discipline
      Muslim Domestic Discipline
      Hindu Domestic Discipline
      Buddhist Domestic Discipline
      Atheist Domestic Discipline
      Agnostic Domestic Discipline
      Wiccan Domestic Discipline
      Any other religion or views about God or the absence thereof Domestic Discipline

      Spanking may become our religion, but religion has nothing to do with spanking!

      Delete
    12. Belle, while tongue-in-cheek, I do plan to just cut anything that takes us into a discussion regarding religion. Seems like every six months so we get a commenter who tries to inject religion into the discussion, and every fucking time it ends up in discussions like what this one has degenerated into. It's hard for me to walk away from the subject entirely, because religious philosophy, religious history, etc. is way up there on my list of personal interests. But, it just isn't worth the headache of dealing with it on the blog.

      Delete
    13. There is a huge difference between describing personal motivations - of which there is a great deal on this blog - and advocacy. A contributor might say that I spank my husband for results, or for x, y or z reasons, without advocating any of these for other couples. But if x, y or z mentions a personal religious component, as part of their personal motivation, with no advocacy intended or implied, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this.

      Delete
    14. I think I agree with this but it's a little abstract as you state it. Can you offer an example?
      Alan

      Delete
    15. The issue with the religious angle to spanking is that there is an implication that it is not just personal. Earlier in this topic, Liz wrote that she and her husband are Christians who practice f/m DD. Nobody on here blinked. But she also said that she and her husband do not practice "Christian Domestic Discipline." She said that because the term Christian Domestic Discipline implies that the Christian religion approves of or even authorizes domestic discipline. That makes it much more than personal. It's making a statement about Christianity, which opens Pandora's box and leads to disagreements and hurt feelings that Dan wants to avoid.
      This is not just semantics. The wording truly makes a difference. Liz happens to be a Christian, a wife, and a spanker of her husband. But she is not a Christian Spanker of Her Husband(upper case), which implies a formal connection between Christianity and spanking of husbands by wives. Try to find THAT in one of Paul's letters!
      Belle

      Delete
    16. Belle, that is one issue. But, the one that has played a bigger role in the past is people who would emphasize certain rationalizations they had come up with to ensure that their use of DD did not somehow impact a hierarchy in which the husband was in control. Implicit in that was the notion that unless someone took similar actions, there was some conflict with Christianity. Sort of a "We're righteous because my husband pulls down his pants down four inches and bends over while leaving his suit on." Also, as I said in my original response, Conversely, and more importantly, I see some significant issues around consent and potential abuse when religion is brought in as somehow commanding obedience of one sex to the other.

      Delete
  8. At the end of the day the core for us was communication and intimacy even though she expected tangible results.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like that sentence a lot, Tomy. I would say that right now I am focusing on tangible results, but seeking those has definitely led to intimacy and communication. We argue a lot less and talk a lot more. One thing I find fascinating is that after punishment we usually have sex, and after sex we usually have intimate and serious conversation (sometimes about the issues that led to punishment and sometimes not). Before our separation, we didn't talk like this after sex. It's really good.
      Belle

      Delete
    2. We do something similar, but with a different sequence. Usually after a spanking, we do have sex but as we are laying there and before really getting started we often talk about the spanking, what led to it, etc.

      Delete
    3. We now usually have sex since she ended a hiatus on lovemaking after spanking that she had imposed for a while. Most of my openness and vulnerability that are produced by discipline are carried over and the lovemaking can be off the charts. But we don’t really talk often about the spanking or what caused it. We used to do that in kind of a debriefing mode during the hiatus but now it’s usually at the next meal we sit down. So far I like it this way because my thoughts are much clearer than after a spanking or after lovemaking. We both feel the communication after ward is crucial
      Alan

      Delete
    4. With Jimmy and me the erotic nature of the transference of authority and punishment of his bare bum is such that there is no chance of conversation until after the eros has been quenched.

      Delete
    5. Belle,
      It’s is the same with us and sometimes the moments after lovemaking can be ideal for discussing any remaining issues re the spanking. But immediately post –orgasm I have not always behaved to meet her expectations. (This apparently is a common problem with some men). So she doesn’t want to talk about the spanking or anything that might trigger bad behavior on my part. So we do it the next day or make sure the opportunity to do it is there. After years of DD, there isn’t much to add to what has happened but we both feel keeping those channels of communication is important
      Alan

      Delete
    6. Alan,
      What post-orgasmic behavior are you talking about? Must not be sleeping, since you mention your wife wanting to avoid conversation triggers. I think you need to fess up!

      Delete
    7. Alan,
      What post-orgasmic behavior are you talking about? Must not be sleeping, since you mention your wife wanting to avoid conversation triggers. I think you need to fess up!

      Delete
    8. Alan, I don't like commenting on other people's marriages, but curious about how what you described works. Does your wife not deal with the issues behind the spanking in full? Is it normally dealt with the following evening?

      The rule my wife and I have agreed is that the issue is dealt with in full before the spanking finishes. As a result, we don't tend to discuss things any further after lovemaking, since they are already dealt with. If anything, it is better to have the spanking go a bit further than necessary to resolve the issue than not far enough.

      One way we have of keeping non-verbal lines of communication open for issues between the end of the spanking and the climax is us doing it with her legs between mine. If my performance was sub-par, she lets me know with a knee in the groin. Normally, we will then do it again.

      Again, I would never want to tell someone else how to run their marriage when it is none of my business, but always keen to share experiences in case it helps others.

      Delete
    9. I will try to get back still this week with both Belle's question and Hugh's. In the meantime, Hugh, I think Belle understands what I said but apparently it wasn't clear to you. I also have to say the following which you wrote sounds barbaric if I am understanding you clearly. Maybe I am not.
      "One way we have of keeping non-verbal lines of communication open for issues between the end of the spanking and the climax is ... If my performance was sub-par, she lets me know with a knee in the groin."

      Alan

      Delete
    10. Alan, not particularly. No more so than DD.

      Delete
    11. Hugh, you seem to want to bring the subject around to the details of your somewhat "atypical" sexual practices and various DD rituals. You might notice that no one is really engaging when you do that. It's becoming a distraction, as is the CDD tangent you got us off on, which led to some unfortunate fall-out among a pretty steady group of commenters.

      Delete
  9. Danielle here:

    Dan, I apologize for using the term “mansplaining” last week. I believe my use of the term was legitimate in the context of my own marriage, but I agree that it can be misapplied. Anyway, I feel as though it derailed the discussion last week, and that acrimony about unfair criticism of men has spilled over into this week’s discussion. I think it is obvious that women are just as capable of behaving as badly as men. That is why the “Karen” meme is so widespread. To be honest, I don’t think men get criticized any more unfairly than women do. The “nagging wife” is an old stereotype that is still common. In fact, the verb “to nag” has such an ingrained gender slant that it would sound strange to speak of a “nagging husband.” I don’t think I have ever heard that phrase.

    I think Belle made a valid point about a significant difference between men and women. Women get pregnant. Men don’t. I think the responsibility of motherhood has a "disciplining" effect on most women. Fatherhood should have a similar effect on men—in good marriages it does—but too often it doesn’t. Maybe one could say that Mother Nature imposes harsher discipline on women than on men.

    Like Belle, I find FLR empowering, and I would find MLR disempowering. But I don’t think FLR is disempowering to my husband the way MLR would be to me. I get that more women are actually into MLR’s than FLR’s. Some women have internalized the traditional patriarchal idea that the husband should lead. Women can be as anti-feminist, and even misogynistic, as the most sexist men. Some feminist women believe in equality of the sexes in society at large, but they have kinks that make them want to be on the receiving end of DD in the intimacy of the bedroom. That's fine. It’s just sex.

    Considering my own marriage, I rejected the patriarchal idea of male superiority that was implicit in my conservative upbringing. But when I had children and stayed home with them for several years, I knowingly accepted to become unequal to my husband economically. I became dependent on him for my standard of living, and I was lucky that he was dependable. But if, in addition to economic dependence, I was subject to DD at his hands, that would feel like an intolerable humiliation to me. Then again, if I had my husband's spanking kink, I would crave that humiliation. Some women do. I think women who are into "Christian DD", for example, have sexual submission kinks amplified by a religious ideology of actual male supremacy. If that turns them on, good for them. But I could never accept it, and I find their ideology of male supremacy repugnant.

    I get KD's annoyance with the veneer of female supremacy/superiority in FLR. But it is, for the most part, a veneer. I see it as a sexy fantasy I playact with my husband. And because biology will never allow us women to be completely free of some level of dependence on the men who father our children, I don't think the fantasy of female supremacy will ever be a threat to sexual equality the way deeply rooted ideologies of male supremacy are. Unfortunately, male supremacy is more than a fantasy, even in 2021, and even among many people in the USA.

    Rereading this, I think maybe I should delete it. I haven’t had time to get into this weeks discussion, and there are so many different strands to it that my thoughts and feelings are scattered. Oh well, I guess I can just be the stereotypical scatterbrained and emotional woman in need of a dose of rationality from the men. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't you dare delete it. It is very well reasoned, even if coming from a scatterbrained woman. ;-)

      Delete
    2. I tend to ignore the CDD variant of DD, so maybe my sense of things is off, but I’m happy to say that most MLR’s I’ve read about or followed are not based on any notion of gender supremacy. It’s a female individual who is on some level submissive, and a male individual who is on some level dominant. The female sub is not necessarily dependent on the male, possibly has her own career and leadership role to play outside the marriage, and is a feminist. She doesn’t just submit to any male. He must be worthy of her trust, and is only as good as the leadership he brings to the table. An explicit kinky element is common, and an attraction to the alpha male or masculine energy, however, there’s often more to it than just sexual foreplay.

      Delete
    3. Brett, I suspect you are right that most MLR's aren't based on a belief in gender supremacy. They are probably rooted in sexual kink, just like the FLR I have with my husband. I don't know that much about CDD. But I do know that social conservative forms of Christianity are generally male supremacist. The Bible itself can easily be interpreted as male supremacist. I was raised in a conservative Catholic home, so I saw Catholic male supremacy up close. From what I have seen, conservative Protestant denominations aren't much different in that respect. Therefore, I think that MLR's, whether involving DD or not, are common in conservative Christian communities.
      Danielle

      Delete
    4. Danielle, I think you’re right. Though I grew up in a secular household in the vanilla world, I’ve seen the same patriarchal society. When I was young, MLR’s came natural and fit the culture. If there were DD elements, I think they also fit comfortably unless “discipline” crossed the line into domestic abuse. If a woman had kinky desires to be spanked, humiliated or treated like a child, that wasn’t part of any mainstream institution or religious teachings I was aware of but, like today, people tend to rationalize their desires as best they can.

      Male supremacy has become more and more a fringe belief, while at the same time, people have much more support for living out their sexual desires. Thus we have the submissive feminist. But the religious right still represents a substantial segment of the country, and their idea of making America great again has much to do with going backwards.

      Delete
    5. I hope I won't irritate people too much by commenting on this subject and I hope this won't lead to rancour, but thought I would offer a small bit of input, interested to see where it goes.

      I'm not aware of anywhere in the Bible suggesting that m-f DD is in any way the done thing. I think anyone believing there is is mistaken.

      However, Ephesians 5:25 talks about the husband loving his wife like Christ loved the church, giving himself up for it. This is one of my main motivations for being willing to suffer the pain of DD for the good of the marriage.

      Passages talking about physical discipline tend to talk about it in the context of males, normally using the word "na'ar", which is most often used to refer to a young man or young men. Also, "gev", "gab" and words with similar roots (commonly used regarding physical discipline) tend to talk about the back as in something convex, suggesting the buttocks as the site for it.

      That's just my two cents. I don't want to start a rancorous discussion.

      Delete
  10. Belle,
    I am answering your question from an earlier thread that seems to have been hijacked. You asked about some post orgasm behavior we confronted some time ago. It wasn’t so much a behavior issue as what she considered a limit on her authority. She has always dealt with any challenge to her authority strongly. But we had agreed a long time ago she wouldn’t spank me right after orgasm which she came to resent. The whole thing was really my fault and a perceptive women (who used to comment on Dan’s blog really inspired me to confront the issue which I did and now it is well behind us (no pun intended) My wife was not comfortable in having sex after a spanking if there was any limits on her authority to correct me if necessary. She was right and I created an issue where there really wasn’t one. Now there are no limits and she is as comfortable as ever in making love after discipline, so all is well. Making love to her after punishment and all those emotions is a wonderful moment for both of us. I intend to make sure I never jeopardize that again
    Alan

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks, Alan, for your reply. DD does seem to be wrapped up with power and control for most of us. Amazing to me that you were willing to give up sex after spanking in order to avoid an occasional post-orgasmic spanking.
    With Jimmy it's quite the opposite. He will agree to almost anything in order to get his post-spanking orgasm! The other day he agreed to plant flowers for me, and he has never done that before. It was so simple. After his spanking he headed straight for the bedroom, but I said, "Oh, I'm not sure I have the energy for sex. I have to plant all those flowers today."
    I'll do it!"
    Sly grin ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Belle,
      You should consider teaching a course on male management 101. Women would flock to it.
      Alan

      Delete
    2. Thanks Alan but I feel like I am just beginning to understand how to manage my male. Every young woman knows about pussy power but it takes a while to understand just how powerful it is when used as barter. Of course males discourage that and some try to lay a guilt trip on us like it's some form of prostitution or a marital right rather than an intimate exchange where both partners must say yes. As macho as Jimmy is, he understands this and isn't adverse to "earning" my charms.
      Of course DD is another tool which definitely enhances the first!

      Delete
    3. The fascinating, funny, ironic thing is that he does these things for me as barter when I would have sex with him anyway because I want to as much as he does and we are making up for three years apart. And ... he knows it too. So it's more of a game than real control and manipulation. But DD is real.

      Delete
    4. Belle,
      I think you have given me a deeper appreciation for the combination of “pussy power” and DD. Probably like a lot of guys I have had pussy power weaponized against me outside of any DD context and it didn’t work for me or for her. On my part I just felt resentment. But used in the framework of DD, as you do and my former girlfriend did, it was like a magic wand – resentment replaced by a desire to please and obey. To the extent the internet reflects social trends, more and more women are discovering the magic in combining pussy power with DD. Thanks for continuing to share your journey.
      Alan

      Delete
    5. Alan, I agree. The severity of DD has increased my authority so much, and Jimmy has learned to obey me so well, that he succumbs to pussy power requests even though he knows that I want sex as much as he does and wouldn't actually deny him until he plants flowers or whatever. But maybe I wss wrong to label it a game. Once obedience is sexualized, which DD accomplishes for males who find it sexy, then maybe he gets a hit off of obedience without DD - especially when I am sexualizing that instance of obedience with pussy denial (actually pussy delay). Maybe he thinks, "Well, she certainly is serious with the bath brush, so maybe she's serious about not giving me pussy until I do this chore. And it feels sexy the way she is bossing me around in this flirtatious manner - she's basically saying do tbis and I'll screw your brains out. So okay!"

      Delete
    6. Yes, in a DD relationship, obedience does become eroticized and I suppose being denied sex if it is understood to be a punishment or discipline would also be erotic. Danielle wrote that her husband apparently eroticized being punished in front of her lover and if that can be eroticized by DD, probably any act of obedience can be. My wife doesn’t deny sex directly (except in the one issue we had with post orgasm correction which is now resolved). But instead she sometimes makes me ask permission at each stage of lovemaking including if I can cum. She usually lets me cum when she is ready but she has denied me at that stage several times and obeying her then was very erotic (even though it was also very difficult). But if she did that every time or very often I am not sure it would still be erotic.
      Alan

      Delete
    7. I certainly don't give him permission for various stages of lovemaking. Once that bedroom door closes, he is in charge. And I like it that way. Spanked husband becomes macho man, the power exchange is reversed, and I want him to turn me every which way but loose (thanks, Clint Eastwood).
      Jimmy and I are learning that we are happiest when one of us is in charge in most aspects of our lives. That reduces conflict dramatically. I like him being in charge of some things and would not want a total FLR. Last weekend we went out for the first time in a long time and when I came out of the bedroom he told me I was showing too much cleavage and to go change. He said, "Only I get to see that much breast." I turned right around and did what he said. It turned me on, too. I want to be his just as much as I want to control him with DD.

      Delete
    8. Understood! We don't want a FLR either which is why I refer to it as DD. But different couples come at it from different styles. My wife does like being in control in the bedroom and I am fine with that. I would also be fine if she felt more like you about it. It's all good
      Alan

      Delete
  12. There is something totally profound and intimate about me being totally in control of him while punishing him and then him being totally in control of me just moments later in the bedroom! I can't even explain it, but the intense, dramatic, and extreme exchanges of power is a mind-fu*k of the highest order and produces a rush like nothing else I have experienced. And Jimmy feels the same. He takes his "little woman" who has just beat his ass and "uses" her for his pleasure (and hers, of course). It's explosive! Literally. I feel like I am for real swinging on the pendulum from one power extreme to the other. Like I'm flying.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I can't even explain it, but ... "
    I think you explain it very well. Naming it might be another matter but it sure sounds like a spiritual experience.
    Alan

    ReplyDelete

This blog is a curated resource for those genuinely and positively interested in DD and FLR lifestyles. Comments that are rude, uncivil, inconsistent with the blog's theme or off-topic may not be posted or may be removed.